I'm working on a sequel for 003 (Applty titled 013 :p) and the thought of sequels came to mind.

As I work on the story line I've found I have drastically bolted away from the original universe 003 seemed to create. I never delved to deeply into 003's universe beyond the events of the story, so I got lots of flexibility but the story line seems to have drastically shifted focus.

003: Focused on the the rising sentience of two AI's (000 "Napoleon" and 003 "Hannibal"). The story dealt with issues common to humans but as they are experienced by a machine and how the two different AI's reacted to it. 000 attempted to destroy humanity finding the human species vile and disgusting. 003 choose to protect humanity embracing every aspect of their nature including their flaws, declaring them as being part of humanities brilliance.

013: Shifted focus from just AI's to include an expanded role for human characters. Content has shifted to more politics, war, life, human and machine relationships, and the concepts of choice (Free will vs Predestination). The human (And alein) characters have slowly taken the prime roles, overshadowing the AI characters.

I still like the story but it makes me wonder. Is it better to write a story and then just leave it as it is? What do you think? Are the times when a sequel could be written but shouldn't? Are sequels always bad?

LordOfHats,


I still like the story but it makes me wonder. Is it better to write a story and then just leave it as it is? What do you think? Are the times when a sequel could be written but shouldn't? Are sequels always bad?

I don't believe there is one blanket answer for your questions.

I think as writers, we all develop, and as we look back on previous works, we might want to revise or restructure.

My view on writing sequels is that they're fine, but if your goal is to get published, maybe write the original, and start the sequel (first 4 or so chapters) to get the mood and characters (if they're the same) and world setting going and then go to another project. I suggest this, as selling the first project may take more than a few years, and sometimes it is easier to pick up if something has been started, plus the intended storyline plotted out).

Unless one can write the sequel so that it is completely stand-alone, if you cannot sell the first novel (get it published), the time and effort spent on the second, may be wasted (other than improving one's writing and storytelling ability).

If while submitting the first novel to different markets (or seeks an agent), an author completes a second unrelated novel, then the author will have two works out there on submission, while the author is working on a third. Plus, if the author does sell one of those written, there are other projects ready to go/offer as a follow up (if a sequel isn't appropriate). Remember, once a novel is accepted, with many markets it can be 9 months to 2 years before it reaches the bookshelves.

Just one opinion on the topic.

Terry

Personally, I find that if I come up with something I find is good, my imagination simply won't stop at the end of the story. For example, my current work is going quite well, I'm halfway through, but my imagination has come up with enough material set both before and after, for a whole series of novels. It gets so frustrating sometimes, as I wish I could just leave something and be happy with it, rather than expanding it to death.

That's never the situation with me. I always get an idea for only one book, and no more. I've never even thought of writing sequels or series or trilogies. As i've never attempted one, i think it's a tough job and i give kudos to the people who have written them (except Christopher Paolini, of course...)

i think it just depends on you as a writer because i know a lot of writers who come up with an idea and see it going far beyond one novel. some writers feel absolutely no need for a sequel. if you feel like you need to write the sequel and believe you can make it as entertaining as the original then by all means go for it.